X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 07:42:10 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: <2thman1@gmail.com> Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.220.43] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.6) with ESMTPS id 6453161 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 02:12:05 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.220.43; envelope-from=2thman1@gmail.com Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id hz10so7424145pad.30 for ; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 23:11:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.251.1 with SMTP id zg1mr1342465pac.160.1378275090127; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 23:11:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Return-Path: <2thman1@gmail.com> Received: from [192.168.1.137] (c-208-53-115-208.customer.broadstripe.net. [208.53.115.208]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ht5sm26715182pbb.29.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Sep 2013 23:11:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: IVP pressurization From: John Barrett <2thman1@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: iPad Mail (10B329) X-Original-Message-Id: <73680B9B-A99C-4D29-8783-A77361561A4E@gmail.com> X-Original-Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 23:11:28 -0700 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Having trouble getting my pressurization to work effectively. I did my best to seal the pressure vessel but never got above .25 PSID with m= y 6 horse shop vac. Used both pressure and vacuum to check for leaks. No s= moke but used a down feather and then a stethoscope with tympanic membrane r= emoved. Outflow valve is covered during these tests. After lots of frustration i hired a guy who has built and/or pressurized abo= ut a dozen IVPs to come take a look. He determined using smoke that there w= ere a couple of slight improvements to be made mostly in the wire bundles th= rough the aft pressure bulkhead and after doing this he declared the vessel s= eal very good. =20 So we deduced that maybe the shop vac is not as efficient at blowing air as I= thought, but my flying experience with the aircraft is that it doesn't do m= uch better than the .25 PSID in flight up to 14.5K ft. =20 Wondering why there is inadequate pressurization with a good pressure vessel= leads to thoughts of outflow valve problems. I bought the device with the k= it in 1996 so it occurs to me the valve could be dirty or rubber diaphragm c= ould be failing, etc. I removed the outflow valve yesterday and tried to ex= amine the parts. i lubricated the mandrel that the poppet valve slides on w= ith a very small spritz of LPS1 lubricant in case there was stiction there. = I did notice that with the poppet valve manually moved to the furthest clos= ed position the diaphragm still had somewhere around a 1/32" gap at the seat= ing perimeters. Should the air pressure in flight fill that diaphragm to cl= ose the gap or does this indicate the valve needs servicing? Finally is there a way short of the manual dump switch to keep the system fr= om pressurizing better than what I see by mismanaging the controller? Am I j= ust setting the pressurization up wrong? Have only been up to 3,000 ft ele= vation airports, (KRDM) and lower - most at sea level. Thanks for any help. John Barrett Sent from my iPad =20=